updates Meet the browser: Firefox Next

[maxelo]

Is anyone using the new mozilla profile manager? http://ftp.mozilla.o...ilemanager/1.0/

Now is very easy to use use all firefox versions without having to change things on shortcuts icons. Besides by changing the user agent string on about:config (nightly and ux are recognized as mobile browsers for some websites) (string->new->general.useragent.override->value=(example: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/8.0) you can try every version without worry.

I wonder if mozilla will add the option to add a new tab as private without having to star a new session. (like google chrome)

[ArialBlue]

Memory consumption is moot when most people now have computers with at least 4GB ram these days. This is like saying I have a 250GB hd and Windows system files take up 15GB. Low ram footprint is always great, but I'm not worried about it when it means giving up performance.

Freeing up memory and allocating memory are not free operations.

[mancode20]

Anyone know how to get the extension Linkification to work with Firefox 9.0 Beta? Almost all of my extensions work except for that one and the Java console. It worked great in 8.0

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

Anyone know how to get the extension Linkification to work with Firefox 9.0 Beta? Almost all of my extensions work except for that one and the Java console. It worked great in 8.0

You can install Addon Compatibility reporter. That should allow it to work.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/add-on-compatibility-reporter/?src=api

[ViperAFK]

Yes I know, 11 is a great deal faster and does better things but the same results could have been with Firefox 4.11. The only reason they jumped the numbers up, was due to Chrome. This cannot be denied. At the rate Mozilla is going we will have a Firefox 20 by 2013.

They jumped the numbers up because they moved to a time based release cycle. Why would they try and artificially inflate version numbers, to compete with chrome's version number, when chrome does NOT ADVERTISE OR REFER TO THEIR VERSION NUMBER ANYWHERE ON THEIR SITE? (and only in the about box as expected in the browser) Chrome is simply referred to as Chrome. not Chrome 11. Chrome.

Firefox is copying their sucessful release cycle, not their version number. The point is to get improvements and features to the users faster, so we don't end up with an outdated, stagnant releases like firefox 3 ended up being before 4 finally came out.

I am a huge fan of this release cycle, its very consistant and streamlines, and the channels are great for testers. So sick of all the whiners trying to insinuate its some ridiculous version number conspiracy, and they feel the need to psot in every thread or article that has to due with firefox.

/rant

[+M2Ys4U Subscriber¹]

They jumped the numbers up because they moved to a time based release cycle. Why would they try and artificially inflate version numbers, to compete with chrome's version number, when chrome does NOT ADVERTISE OR REFER TO THEIR VERSION NUMBER ANYWHERE ON THEIR SITE? (and only in the about box as expected in the browser) Chrome is simply referred to as Chrome. not Chrome 11. Chrome.

Firefox is copying their sucessful release cycle, not their version number. The point is to get improvements and features to the users faster, so we don't end up with an outdated, stagnant releases like firefox 3 ended up being before 4 finally came out.

I am a huge fan of this release cycle, its very consistant and streamlines, and the channels are great for testers. So sick of all the whiners trying to insinuate its some ridiculous version number conspiracy, and they feel the need to psot in every thread or article that has to due with firefox.

/rant

:yes:

[Brandon H Supervisor]

just realized the home tab was backed out of on the UX branch, anyone know why?

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

They jumped the numbers up because they moved to a time based release cycle. Why would they try and artificially inflate version numbers, to compete with chrome's version number, when chrome does NOT ADVERTISE OR REFER TO THEIR VERSION NUMBER ANYWHERE ON THEIR SITE? (and only in the about box as expected in the browser) Chrome is simply referred to as Chrome. not Chrome 11. Chrome.

Firefox is copying their sucessful release cycle, not their version number. The point is to get improvements and features to the users faster, so we don't end up with an outdated, stagnant releases like firefox 3 ended up being before 4 finally came out.

I am a huge fan of this release cycle, its very consistant and streamlines, and the channels are great for testers. So sick of all the whiners trying to insinuate its some ridiculous version number conspiracy, and they feel the need to psot in every thread or article that has to due with firefox.

/rant

I am glad to hear that, then I hope that you are testing every release up and including the final.

[Kaoxt]

Why does it matter if he is or isn't testing?

[+Zlip792 MVC]

Some sweetness related to addons - more will come soon - in the end (default compatibility of addons)

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=700201

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=695977

-Removal Trace Monkey JS engine code may happen this week, which means 67k lines code going to finish its journey in FF. Also related bugs to it will die. (in test process currently)

-Silent Updates (removal of UAC dialog) work is finished and may land soon. (in review process currently)

-Partial support of Chrome to FF your data import is done, may land soon (in review process currently)

[dnast]

I am glad to hear that, then I hope that you are testing every release up and including the final.

There is no need to follow each version through Nightly, Aurora, then Beta, and especially not after Final is released. If a bug or feature isn't fixed coming out of Nightly then that usually means you can just keep following it in the next version of Nightly. Aurora is basically for stability testing of the Nightly patches that landed and Beta is pretty much what the Release Candidates used to be.

[mancode20]

You can install Addon Compatibility reporter. That should allow it to work.

https://addons.mozil...porter/?src=api

I knew about that, but I didn't think I'd have to do that since all my other addons work. I found a hacked version that works, though. Here is the link to it for anyone that wants it. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2061460/linkification_1.3.9c.xpi

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

There is no need to follow each version through Nightly, Aurora, then Beta, and especially not after Final is released. If a bug or feature isn't fixed coming out of Nightly then that usually means you can just keep following it in the next version of Nightly. Aurora is basically for stability testing of the Nightly patches that landed and Beta is pretty much what the Release Candidates used to be.

The nightly patches are for the Nightly builds. Aurora has it's own patching process. By the time a build reaches the Aurora stage it is stable. The build I am using right now is stable.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0a1) Gecko/20111116 Firefox/11.0a1

[Samurizer]

The nightly patches are for the Nightly builds. Aurora has it's own patching process. By the time a build reaches the Aurora stage it is stable. The build I am using right now is stable.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0a1) Gecko/20111116 Firefox/11.0a1

Grinder, can you do us all a favor and at least go and read up on some official resources before spewing your misinformation all over the place? I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, but if it's to be helpful and share accurate information, you are failing horribly at it.

[Brandon H Supervisor]

just realized the home tab was backed out of on the UX branch, anyone know why?

anyone?

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

Grinder, can you do us all a favor and at least go and read up on some official resources before spewing your misinformation all over the place? I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here, but if it's to be helpful and share accurate information, you are failing horribly at it.

What I posted is correct. Nightly patches are for Nightly builds. Aurora patches are for Aurora builds. You sir are the one that fails to comprehend a very simple concept. I suggest that you visit some of the sites below and educate yourself:

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Features/Release_Tracking

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Main_Page

https://quality.mozilla.org/

https://affiliates.mozilla.org/en-US/

http://www.andrewturnbull.net/mozilla/historyfx.html

https://developer.mozilla.org/en

You can do me a favor and just leave me alone as you are contributing nothing.

anyone?

https://wiki.mozilla.org/Features/Desktop/Firefox_Home_Tab

The above is all I can find on it.

[Samurizer]

What I posted is correct. Nightly patches are for Nightly builds. Aurora patches are for Aurora builds.

I see now that rather than educating yourself, you're choosing to throw a hissy fit over your ignorance getting called out. So would you mind telling us which one of your posted links back up your claim above, or that Aurora is stable? :rolleyes:

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

I see now that rather than educating yourself, you're choosing to throw a hissy fit over your ignorance getting called out. So would you mind telling us which one of your posted links back up your claim above, or that Aurora is stable? :rolleyes:

You still have a problem with the English language. I said that The Nightly build that I am using is stable. To this is can prove as it has never crashed. I did use Aurora while it was still under the release as a Nightly and at that time it was stable. I do not use Aurora now so I have no Idea of it's stability other than to say if the build was stable as a Nightly, logic would dictate that it is stable in the second release phase which is Aurora,

[Semtex]

I need to switch from Nightly to Aurora today, since yesterday Nightly build I'm facing memory leaks, when You look in about:memory after few minutes of browsing there will be entry: "Heap Unclassified" which is not releasing memory and during browsing this memory is stuck there for good (browser restart), I've check this in save mode, normal mode with all adds disabled, same thing over and over again, on Mozilla forum I saw some similar reports but looks like no one is taking this seriously... :)

Edit:

OK, Looks like bug is on https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=702813

[dnast]

I need to switch from Nightly to Aurora today, since yesterday Nightly build I'm facing memory leaks, when You look in about:memory after few minutes of browsing there will be entry: "Heap Unclassified" which is not releasing memory and during browsing this memory is stuck there for good (browser restart), I've check this in save mode, normal mode with all adds disabled, same thing over and over again, on Mozilla forum I saw some similar reports but looks like no one is taking this seriously... :)

Edit:

OK, Looks like bug is on https://bugzilla.moz...g.cgi?id=702813

I'm experiencing the same issue. Thanks for the link.

The nightly patches are for the Nightly builds. Aurora has it's own patching process. By the time a build reaches the Aurora stage it is stable. The build I am using right now is stable.

Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:11.0a1) Gecko/20111116 Firefox/11.0a1

Yeah, the Nightly builds have been very stable for me for quite some time, too. That being said there's still a chance that you'll run into issues (like the one above) that an Aurora user would be less likely to encounter.

From some of your other posts you seemed to hint that you should test, for example, Nightly 11, then Aurora 11, and so on. I was just saying there's no need to do so. I wasn't saying that each channel doesn't get their own patches.

[remixedcat]

I had that same issue when I updated my nightly and finally got to restoring it. browsed the net for a while... had the same thing.

had 2.2GB commit and 2.1GB RAM usage overnight. I only left 15 tabs open overnight. but with 120 approx browser actions.

[+Gary7 Subscriber²]

I'm experiencing the same issue. Thanks for the link.

Yeah, the Nightly builds have been very stable for me for quite some time, too. That being said there's still a chance that you'll run into issues (like the one above) that an Aurora user would be less likely to encounter.

From some of your other posts you seemed to hint that you should test, for example, Nightly 11, then Aurora 11, and so on. I was just saying there's no need to do so. I wasn't saying that each channel doesn't get their own patches.

What I said is that I do not do that, I stay with the Nightly Builds. I did say that the Builds that I did test turned into Aurora and they were stable when I tested them in the nightly channel. One may run into problems no matter what channel that they are on. It is supposed to be that the Final is more stable than the Beta and the Beta is more stable than Aurora and so forth. But it does not always work that way. Firefox 8.01 will be released later today or tomorrow , so I suppose a problem was found. More than likely a security issue.

[remixedcat]

More then a security issue. People were having issues with sessions not restoring properly. not all tabs would resume.

[Samurizer]

You still have a problem with the English language. I said that The Nightly build that I am using is stable. To this is can prove as it has never crashed. I did use Aurora while it was still under the release as a Nightly and at that time it was stable. I do not use Aurora now so I have no Idea of it's stability other than to say if the build was stable as a Nightly, logic would dictate that it is stable in the second release phase which is Aurora,

Or maybe you should learn some technical knowledge about software and realize that stability entails a lot more than simply not crashing. And even then the current Aurora channel contained at least two crasher bugs when it was first released. Just because you don't run into them since you don't do extensive testing doesn't mean no one else does.

There's also no such thing as Aurora "having its own patching process". If you really knew how Bugzilla works you'd also know that all incoming patches are always merged with mozilla-central first, but tracking flags can be nominated for each bug to be merged to other release channels as well without waiting for the patched mozilla-central code to trickle out to them days or weeks later.

Again, if your intention is to help, then please make sure you have accurate information before you do. If your intention here is simply to put on a show of being more intelligent and informed than you actually are... then carry on, I guess.

[mancode20]

Anyone know why Firefox always slows down and even locks up for a few seconds whenever downloads are done? I don't have that issue with Chrome or other browsers. Is it because of the pop-up notification, poor code, bad extension, or what? Is that being worked on? It's my only real complaint right now. Surely I'm not the only one experiencing this, right? I'm using 9.0 Beta